Community Hospital Anderson
Legal name: Community Hospital of Anderson and Madison County Inc
Nonprofit profile at a glance
- EIN
- 351069822
- IRS 990 coverage
- 2010–2024
- Official website data refreshed
- Sep 2026
- Forms available
- Form 990 2024, Form 990-T 2024
- Location
- Anderson, IN, US
- Phone
- 765-298-2536
- Rating
- 67
- Verdict
- SUPPORTED
- Rating confidence
- Moderate
- Sector
- Hospital, General
Reported finances
- Revenue
- $227,294,571
- Expenses
- $218,310,865
- Assets
- $415,678,807
- Liabilities
- $9,884,490
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Amounts in USD.
Leadership & pay
21 people listed
Highest reported compensation
- JASON FAHRLANDER (DIRECTOR): $1,869,312 total reported compensation
- ELIZABETH S THARP MBA BSN RN (SVP-HOSPITAL ACUTE SERVICE): $1,179,930 total reported compensation
- ANNE FORD MD (DIRECTOR THROUGH NOV. 2024): $558,825 total reported compensation
Source: IRS Form 990. Selected filing: tax year 2024. Names and roles reflect this filing, not necessarily current officeholders.
Overview
Mission
To serve the medical, health and human service needs of the people in Anderson, Madison County and contiguous counties with compassion, dignity, respect and excellence.
What it reported doing in 2024
Community hospital of anderson and madison county, inc. ("cha") is an acute care medical facility with 117 staffed beds (excluding nursery). In 2024, there were 6,493 admissions, 7,491 surgeries performed, 688 births with a total of 274,587 patients served in all disciplines. Cha participates in medicare, medicaid, champus, tricare, and other government-sponsored health care programs. We provide an emergency room that is open to all persons regardless of ability to pay. Our staff makes every effort to provide an effective and efficient health care delivery system. Finally, we have a governing body in which independent persons representative of the community comprise the majority of the board.
Operating model
- Revenue model
- Earned-program. 99% of the money available for current operations came from fees and other program revenue.
- Distribution model
- Direct operator. The filing allocates 100% of reported program-service expenses outside its grant, affiliate-payment, and member-benefit lines. This expense classification does not rule out separately announced grant awards.
The verdict
SUPPORTED - A large share of available resources goes toward mission work and the filed numbers largely add up. Few specific pay-setting methods are documented in the filing; unanswered boxes are not proof of absence and some filing-based governance responses are negative or unanswered.
Rating breakdown
- Financial Efficiency: 60
- Transparency & Controls: 70
- Accountability: 70
- Sustainability: 61
- Growth: 100
Detailed rating inputs
Financial Efficiency
- Mission deployment rate: 66.4%; rating input score 66
- Program expense ratio: 69.2%; rating input score 69
- Fundraising efficiency: Limited
Transparency & Controls
- Consistency checks: 92.3%; rating input score 92; 12th percentile among comparable filings
- Pay-setting controls: 0 of 6 controls in place; rating input score 0
- Compensation committee: Missing
- Independent consultant: Missing
- Other Form 990s reviewed: Missing
- Written employment contract: Missing
- Compensation survey or study: Missing
- Board or committee approval: Missing
- Foreign activity oversight: Limited
- Grant itemization coverage: 85.7%; rating input score 86; 20th percentile among comparable filings
- Major donor itemization: Yes; rating input score 100
- Related-party transparency: Yes; rating input score 100
Accountability
- Independent voting board: 66.7%; rating input score 67; 19th percentile among comparable filings
- Governance controls: 6 of 9 controls in place; rating input score 75
- Conflict-of-interest policy: Pass
- Whistleblower policy: Pass
- Document-retention policy: Pass
- CEO compensation review process: Limited
- Other executive compensation review process: Fail
- Form 990 shared with the board: Fail
- Board meeting minutes documented: Pass
- Audit committee oversight: Pass
- Independent financial-statement audit: Pass
Sustainability
- Operating margin: 4%; rating input score 52; 52nd percentile among comparable filings
- Total-asset coverage ratio: 1.9; rating input score 61; 61st percentile among comparable filings
- Liabilities to assets ratio: 0.02; rating input score 93; 93rd percentile among comparable filings
- Officer compensation ratio: 1.6%; rating input score 64; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Growth
- Program expense growth: 2.3% per year; rating input score 100; 17th percentile among comparable filings
- Revenue growth: 4.6% per year; rating input score 100; 39th percentile among comparable filings
- Asset growth: 8.8% per year; rating input score 100; 64th percentile among comparable filings
Details
- What they do: 4 programs and campaigns described on the official site · 2 operating locations identified
- Where the money goes: 66.4% of revenue deployed · 69.2% of spending went to programs
- Governance: 8 of 12 board members independent · 6 of 9 filing controls reported
- Programs: 2 filed program accomplishments · $151M in reported program spending
- Leadership: top reported pay $1.9M · 21 people listed · 0 of 6 pay-setting controls reported
- Highest-paid contractors: 5 contractors listed · $13.9M reported
- Consistency: 31 of 32 current checks pass · 1 finding to review
- Schedules: 8 filed schedules · includes major donors, grants, executive pay, and related organizations
- Filing history: 14 filing years from 2010 to 2024
- Contacts: How to reach this organization
- Money network: 11 filed money-flow records
- Related organizations: 37 filed related-organization links
- Grant readiness: Federal tax and exclusion status, award history, and grant-maker relationships.
- People: Everyone the filings name, and which of them the filings identify by more than a name.
Key Signals
Signals prioritize questions for review. They are not findings of misconduct.
- High — Transparency & Controls: Pay-setting controls scored 0/100.
- Review — Accountability: Governance controls: 2 of 8 not reported.
- Review — Sustainability: Operating margin scored 52/100.
- Review — Transparency & Controls: Domestic grant itemization did not reconcile in the filed values.